Allowed

Akshay S/O Panjab Chavhan and Another v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Civil Lines Akola Tq. and Dist.Akola and Another

Bombay HC27 Mar 2024APL/524/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two students sought quashing of an FIR under Section 509/34 IPC alleging indecent gestures toward two women. As neither the FIR nor investigation disclosed any specific sexual gestures or acts constituting the essential ingredients of the offence, the High Court quashed the criminal case using its inherent powers.

What did the court decide?

Regular Criminal Case No. 390/2024 and Crime No. 140/2024 (Ss. 509, 34 IPC) quashed and set aside.

Akshay S/O Panjab Chavhan and Another vs State of Mah. Thr… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:11675-DB

¶2

1 23apl524.24..odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 524 OF 2024

¶5

Akshay s/o Panjab Chavan, Age 24 yrs, Occ. Student, R/o. At Post Dahegaon Gawande, Tah and District Akola

¶6

Abhijeet Awatar Tayade, Age 26 yrs, Occ. Student, R/o. Goregaon Kh. Akola, District Akola …... APPLICANTS

¶7

...V E R S U S...

¶8

The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Police Station Civil Lines, Akola Tah. Akola, District Akola

¶9

Sunil s/o Laxmanrao Khapre, Aged 54 yrs, Occ. Service, Po. H.C. Batch No. 33, R/o. Police Station Civil Lines, Akola, Tal and District Akola .....NON-APPLICANTS

¶10

Mr. S.K. Wankhade, Advocate for applicants. Mr. M.K. Pathan, APP for respondent No.1 /State ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶11

CORAM:- VINAY JOSHI & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ. DATE : 17.10.2024

¶12

JUDGMENT (Per : Vinay Joshi, J.)

¶13

Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard

¶14

finally with consent of learned Counsel for the parties.

¶15

2 23apl524.24..odt

¶16

This is an application seeking to quash the criminal prosecution bearing Regular Criminal Case No. 390/2024 arising out of Crime No. 140/2024, registered with respondent No.1 Police Station, for offence punishable under Section 509 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

At the instance of report lodged by Police Constable, crime has been registered. It is the prosecution case that at the relevant time, two women made complaint that the applicants were making indecent gestures with intention to insult their modesty and therefore, the offence.

¶18

The learned Counsel appearing for the applicants would submit that the First Information Report coupled with the statement of both the women does not disclose us as to what are the sexual gestures or the acts performed by the applicants. Though, the learned APP resisted the application, he is unable to point out the actual sexual gestures or the act performed by the applicants.

¶19

The learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant No. 1 Akshay Chavan is an aspirant to join the Indian

¶20

3 23apl524.24..odt

¶21

Army for which he had received the call letter, copy of which is produced on record. It is has submitted that due to pendency of this proceedings, he may loose his job and the same would affect his future.

¶22

Apart from that we have gone through the entire material on record and the decision dated 2.7.2024 of Kerla High Court in the case of Arun A Vs. State of Kerla (CRL. MC. No. 5613/2024). Similar issue is dealt with by the Kerla High Court having the pari materia penal provision under Section 119(1)(a) of the Kerla Police Act, 2011. Particularly our attention has been invited to paragraph No. 6 of the said decision, which reads as below:

¶23

“6. Reading Section 119(1)(a) of the KP Act, it has been provided that, any person who, - (a) performs, in public places, any sexual gestures or acts degrading the dignity of women, is an offence. Thus, performing of any sexual gestures or acts in public places degrading dignity of women is the essential ingredient to constitute an offence punishable under Section 119(a) of the KP Act. If the sexual gestures or acts performed by the accused could not be discernible from the FIR, Final Report or other materials, mere assumption of the Detecting Officer as well as the Investigating Officer that the accused performed or showed sexual gestures or acts degrading the dignity of women, keeping the gestures or acts in his mind in secrecy, would not suffice to constitute an offence

¶24

4 23apl524.24..odt

¶25

under Section 119(1)(a) of the KP Act”.

¶26

On careful examination of the facts of the case, it is evident that the material collected during the investigation could not disclose as to what actual gestures or acts have been performed by the applicants. In absence of the said essential ingredients the prosecution would not sustain. In the circumstances, the applicants have made out prima facie case to exercise our inherent powers.

¶27

In view of the above, the application is allowed, accordingly we proceed to pass following order:

¶28

i) Regular Criminal Case No. 390/2024 arising out of Crime No. 140/2024, registered with respondent No.1 Police Station, for offence punishable under Section 509 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶29

Steno copy granted.

¶30

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)

¶31

Signed by: Mr. R. S. Belkhede R. Belkhede, Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Personal Assistant Date: 17/10/2024 18:48:46

Akshay S/O Panjab Chavhan and Another v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Civil Lines Akola Tq. and Dist.Akola and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshay S/O Panjab Chavhan and Another v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Civil Lines Akola Tq. and Dist.Akola and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Aatif Ali Meer Athar vs the State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Old City Akola and Another.

Aatif Ali Meer Athar vs the State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Old City Akola and Another.

Aatif Ali Meer Athar vs the State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Old City Akola and Another.

Vijay Bhimrao Deshmukh (C-5924) vs Divisional Commissioner Amravati, Dist. Amravati and Another

Ankush S/O Vilasrao Pakhale vs the State of Maharashtra Tkhr. Pso Arvi Tah.Arvi Dist.Wardha and Another

Ankush S/O Vilasrao Pakhale vs the State of Maharashtra Tkhr. Pso Arvi Tah.Arvi Dist.Wardha and Another